DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002416248-0003

Invalidity · first instance · 2023-10-26

000120379

Contested design: 002416248-0003

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text

The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 002416248-0003 is rejected. The applicant bears the holder’s costs, fixed at EUR 400.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

WIND-DAM Filip Piórowskivia PDF extraction

Poland (PL)

ul. Bartosza Wojciecha Głowackiego, nr 2, lok. 4, 82200 Malbork, Poland

Represented by

Marcin Staniszewski

Holder · RCD owner

Ergosafe Aktiebolag

Sweden (SE)

Reparatörgatan 1, 302 62 Halmstad, Sweden

Prior art cited (2)

Web disclosureD1

Adjustable Glass Railing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0O2r2FLJfo · YouTube · disclosed 2012-04-16

Web disclosureD2

adjustable glass railing design shown in YouTube screenshots

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cxv1nwuDbco · YouTube

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 5(1)(b)Article 6(1)(b)Article 7Article 8(1)Article 8(2)

Argument summary

  • Applicant claimed lack of novelty and individual character over two earlier YouTube-disclosed adjustable glass railing designs and also invoked technical-function and interconnection grounds.
  • Holder argued the cited disclosures were incomplete or not properly invoked, denied identity or the same overall impression, and contested the applicant's late-added evidence as inadmissible.
  • The Division admitted D1 and D2 as internet disclosures under Article 7, but found D1 not identical and D2 created a different overall impression because of frameless panels and lighter posts.
  • The Article 8 grounds were not assessed for lack of substantiation, and the invalidity application was rejected with costs against the applicant.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVÁ
  • MemberElisabetta FERRARO
  • MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
deDeutsch (de)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esespañol (es)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

25.01

Similar decisions

Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000128596

vs Griptel AB

2025-07-17Art 25(1)(b)257
000124436

vs Ziel Home Furnishing Technology Co., Ltd.

2024-11-19Art 25(1)(b)257
000121138

vs TABB Interior Systems B.V.

2024-01-15Art 25(1)(b)257
000121099

vs TABB Interior Systems B.V.

2024-01-15Art 25(1)(b)257
000121100

vs TABB Interior Systems B.V.

2024-01-15Art 25(1)(b)257
000120958

vs Yimei Zhu

2023-07-27Art 25(1)(b)257
000119859

vs BoZarc

2023-06-02Art 25(1)(b)257
000117077

vs Budotechnika Sp. o.o.

2022-12-13Art 25(1)(b)257